upvote
Ah yes, I too conflate bills written by organized lobbyists with a loosely affiliated group that says American shouldn't be ran by Nazi's. The Nazi's running America get very mad about that and ensure to flood the airwaves with how cities in the US are mile wide smoking craters due to people who don't like authoritarians.
reply
The point GP was making, which holds as a general rule, is that simply adopting a moniker does not necessarily mean that it accurately describes you. Your argument pre-supposed that just because Antifa self-describes as antifascist, it inherently is, and that the CEO was expressing an opposition to the concept of antifascism, rather than simply expressing opposition to the specific group.

If Antifa’s record speaks for itself, then you don’t need to play these kinds of word games. If some CEO spoke unflatteringly of The Red Cross or Habitat For Humanity, that would say more about them than anything, not because they have virtuous sounding names (though they admittedly do) but because they’ve established a specific track record of public service.

reply
I don't even know what antifa _is_ anymore, honestly. I only see it used as a boogie man by the right in discourse online.

But I _do_ know that when someone tags someone as "antifa" they are making a political statement and aligning themselves with a certain group that perceives "antifa" a certain way. "See, I hate those damn' antifa terrorists, I'm in the same camp as you! Please help my company make money!"

reply
No disagreement there, and I think it was an inane comment on Langley’s part, to be clear
reply
The point pixl97 was making was that they believed anti-anti-fascist described the Flock CEO.

If Flock's reputation spoke for itself, their CEO wouldn't have to play these kind of legal games.

reply
deleted
reply
I've read your comment twice, and I can't make heads or tails of what you're trying to say.

> If some CEO spoke unflatteringly of The Red Cross or Habitat For Humanity,

Those are organizations. "Antifa" is a descriptive term that many people and organizations use, whether they have connections to one another or not. What is the comparison you are trying to draw here?

> If Antifa’s record speaks for itself, then you don’t need to play these kinds of word games.

You are using the possessive here, "Antifa's", in a way that seems grammatically incorrect to me.

"Antifa" is usually an adjective, but sometimes a known, like "vegan" or "blonde". Saying "if blonde's record speaks for itself", it seems like obviously broken English.

Usually you'd use this phraseology to describe a person or organization, "Joe's record", "Nabisco's record", etc.

What is the entity or entities whose record(s) you are trying to describe?

reply
>Those are organizations. "Antifa" is a descriptive term that many people and organizations use, whether they have connections to one another or not. What is the comparison you are trying to draw here?

How's this different than say how "alt right" is pejoratively used by the left?

reply
It's very much the same thing, there is no single unifying "Alt-Right" central headquarters, subscription fees amd newsletter, just as there is no specific Antifa organisation, just many people and a few groups that self identify as being against facism.

On the AltRight side people might point to, say, Steven Miller and his Nazi adjacent statements, or to Nick Fuentes and the Groypers, or to Andrew Anglin and The Daily Stormer for more trad. Nazi views.

To be honest I'm not entirely sure what the leading antifa groups in central north america might be.

reply
deleted
reply
> The point GP was making, which holds as a general rule, is that simply adopting a moniker does not necessarily mean that it accurately describes you.

I'm deeply curious why you think someone would identify as an anti-fascist if they were not, in fact, anti-fascist. Do you think they just really like the flag logo or...?

reply
[flagged]
reply
Being opposed to antifa because some of the people using the label are violent seems to be painting with an overly broad brush.
reply
I know we're not supposed to talk about it, but what in the world is happening to this site? Mistaking 'Antifa' for 'the concept of opposing fascism' is not the kind of failure mode I expect here. And this kind of thing has become endemic lately- emotive noise and sarcastic dunks drowning out substance in every thread, especially since the beginning of December. Or am I just imagining this?
reply
What is Antifa, then?
reply
> Mistaking 'Antifa' for 'the concept of opposing fascism'

that's literally what it means in theory and in practice

reply
'The concept of opposing fascism' doesn't mean anything in practice. You have to implement practice around it, you can't just literally do a concept!
reply
Fighting fascist is the primary way to oppose them. The fighting bit often requires violence. That's what it takes, because it involves fighting a group of people that are not a peaceful bunch and have very violent intentions.
reply
Yes, exactly my point. And once you are picking targets and taking violent actions, you can no longer excuse your aim and your violence by saying your heart is in the right place. Antifa has, for many decades, done wrong actions with good intentions. You can oppose them without being fascist.
reply
you say that as if people are not actively physically opposing fascism in deed in the united states right now!
reply
By physically opposing fascism, I assume you mean they are taking specific practical actions rather than becoming one with the platonic concept of opposition to fascism.

It may seem an obvious or insignificant point, but it is critical here. If they physically oppose fascism by following and filming ICE, I'm very much on board. If they oppose it by molotoving innocent local government buildings, I am against. If both of these actions are the concept of opposing fascism, what does it mean to be against that?

Antifa are belligerants. They undermine protests by having the maturity to die for a cause but not to live for one. One can be against that without being fascist.

reply
> Approximately nobody is against "antifa" because they're fighting "fascists".

So, I will say that far right, comservatives and fascists are against anti-fascism of any kind. Whether it is the boogeyman antifa or anything else. And there are a lot of people like that. Including in goverment.

They do take issue with anyone who openly opposes fascism.

reply